Ok, being the average gamer that I am, my understanding of generations means that every couple of years, the platform holders release new consoles that run games you can only play on them. Hence we have PS4/XB1 games thst you cant juat put into a PS3/360 and it will work.

So "generations are over" to me means that going forward, everything works on everything. I don't know which other interpretation of that phrase exists. It means that someone with an XB1x now, has (if they choose) bought the last console they will ever need to buy because in 2023, when Fallout 5 ia released you can just take the game and slap it into XB1x and it will run.

For thay to be possible, it means the XB1X (and more importantly, the PS4/XB1 but lets just pretend the XB1X is its own new generation of hardware) can and will hold its own against the PS5 and XB2. Because it will at least be able to run theirr games by default albeit at a lower rez bjt at least you can just go to store and buy a XB2 game and put it in the XB1X and it will work.

We are telling you that that is Bullshit. That there will be a XB2 and its games will not work on the XB1/XB1X. Which is the literal definition of what the average gamer understands by generations. 

So yes, its contradictory to say gens are over and and also say the XB1X won,t hold its own against the PS5/XB2. 

Sigh..... you are all over the place. The nintendo switch is more powerful than the wiiU. has features that the wiiu lacks. You cannot make a game for the switch and it will by default work on the wiiU.

I don,t know qhy you think gens are gauged by the CPU, the wholw reason the CPU came into this was cause it was the easiest way to prove a poibt to you that you have just refuswd to grasp. 

Gens are about new things that are possble that requires new hardware to run. 

You know what nvm.......

lol, you said that CPU is the main driver behind it! You're all over the place too! I'm just stating facts here. Dude, if gens were based on new things that are possible through new hardware, there should have been 20 generations by now, lol. Yes, please just forget it. Because there is no concrete definition for game console generations, and because one company thinks differently than the other, neither of us are right. Like I said, stick with how you interpret it. Done.

I think us enthusiast gamers would get the most out of a $500 box that has the best ram,cpu,gpu combination possible. And it would allow Sony to not take much of a loss. But maybe $400 and taking a loss is preferable for Sony but it will just mean we won't see a price drop for a while.

I doubt they will. They might make a $500 machine at $400 pricetag, but I don't think we'll ever see a PlayStation over $500 again.

Dude.....don't waste your time bashing your head on a wall.you could use this time to play more games.

Yeah, I'm done. Subjective disputes always end like this. I've got midterms to worry about.Wasted a good hour on a convo that went nowhere. 

Or we get several tiers of hardware out of the gate.

That is a bold claim. Now prove it.

Overall I don't think it really matters. The Playstation 4 Pro hasn't exactly been smashing the base Playstation 4 in terms of sales rate.

...Like...?

The Pro and Xbox One X are basically taking the same games, running them at a higher resolution/framerate with sometimes an increase in visual settings.
That's pretty much all there is to it.

The Xbox One X however does tend to get a few more extra visual settings, higher resolutions and framerates more often.

In the end though, both platforms are typically just taking advantage of extra settings that were already made for another technically superior platform, the PC, they still aren't receiving everything though.

Why does it need it? And how does it relate to how expensive it is?

Yeah. GPU's right now aren't representative of actual costs though.
DRAM prices have artificially inflated prices... And then they have additional pressure from bitcoin snapping up GPU's left, right and center.
I suggest you don't take the current price dynamics as something representative of chip costs.

Good thing higher density RAM released this year... And stronger CPU's have been around for the good part of a decade.

That is because it did. The Xbox 360 had a Radeon x1900 hybrid GPU which did legitimately give high-end GPU's a run for it's money. - Well, until nVidia brought forth the amazing Geforce 8800, then the PC was ahead of consoles again.

However... GPU's have gotten exponentially faster, larger, more power hungry and expensive, it will never happen again.
Even the Xbox One X has a mid-range GPU. - And that was a "Premium" console.

To Microsoft's credit, they have taken Jaguar as far as it can go.
It's got a decent clock rate at 2.3ghz, it won't set any records on fire though, but 700mhz is 700mhz over the Playstation 4.

However... Where things get muddied is that Microsoft has offloaded as much work as they could that is typically done on the CPU onto the GPU/Fixed function blocks, so developers if they do the right thing... Should extract more out of the Xbox One X CPU than the clock rate frequency bump implies.

My 10 year old PC's Core 2 processor is faster than what's in the Xbox One X. So not really saying much. :P

With inflation $400 in 2020 will be quite cheap for a powerful next gen console. I think they they'll be able to sell their PS5 maybe $450 thanks to their mid-gen console.

If they make a $400 box in 2020, it won't be an impressive console. Less impressive than PS4 at launch, similar in specs to what XB1 was at launch.. And Microsoft won't be afraid to release a much more powerful console, like they did with the X.

700mhz over the PS4, 200mhz over the Pro.

Jaguar ia jaguar tho, there isn't any amount of sorcery that will change how weak it is conpared to what PCs will be in thw next gen consoles. Likw we are talking likw 4-5 times the processing power. Anything that needs to be done to make the most of the jaguar PCs at that time will simply not-be worth the effort.